Nevada Democrat lawmakers are once again taking aim at school choice.
Senate Bill 318, introduced by several Democratic senators, seeks to restrict how charter schools operate by banning their ability to contract with educational management organizations.
If passed, the bill would place unnecessary hurdles on these schools, limiting their ability to provide quality education and operate efficiently.
Senator Carrie Buck, a strong supporter of charter schools, didn’t hold back in her criticism of SB 318. She made her stance clear, stating, “I’m hoping the first bill the Governor will VETO is the horrible bill.”
Many conservatives and school choice advocates agree.
They see this bill as yet another attempt by the government to tighten its grip on education, taking away options from parents and students who rely on charter schools for better opportunities.
What’s in the Bill?
SB 318 targets educational management organizations (EMOs), private companies that help charter schools with administration, staffing, and curriculum development.
These organizations allow charter schools to operate more efficiently, ensuring that students get a quality education without unnecessary government interference.
The bill would prohibit charter schools from contracting with EMOs, forcing them to handle all administrative duties themselves.
This would put extra strain on school leaders, taking their focus away from students and learning.
Additionally, the bill adds more red tape when it comes to charter school construction, repairs, and facility management.
Schools would now have to navigate stricter government oversight, potentially delaying important projects and increasing costs.
How Would This Hurt Charter Schools?
The impact of this bill would be significant. Here’s how:
- Increased Bureaucracy – Charter schools would be forced to manage all operations in-house, adding layers of paperwork and administrative burdens. Many small charter schools simply do not have the resources to do this effectively.
- Higher Costs – Without the ability to contract with EMOs, schools might have to hire more full-time staff, increasing expenses and taking money away from classroom resources.
- Fewer Educational Options – If some charter schools struggle to comply with these new rules, they may shut down. This means fewer choices for parents and students seeking alternatives to traditional public schools.
- Delays in School Improvements – The added oversight on school construction and maintenance could mean schools wait longer for necessary upgrades, potentially affecting student learning environments.
Who Benefits from This Bill?
Many conservatives believe SB 318 is part of a broader effort by teachers’ unions and progressive lawmakers to stifle competition for public schools.
Charter schools give parents an alternative to underperforming government-run schools, and that threatens the education establishment.
By making it harder for charter schools to function, lawmakers are protecting the public school system from competition, not helping students get a better education.
The bill’s supporters argue that EMOs take money away from schools and that charter schools should be directly responsible for their operations. However, charter schools are already held to strict performance standards.
If a school isn’t serving students well, parents have the power to choose another option—unlike traditional public schools, where families are often stuck with whatever school their district assigns them.
The Conservative Case Against SB 318
Charter schools represent innovation, freedom, and school choice.
They allow families to seek better educational opportunities for their children, and they often outperform traditional public schools, particularly in low-income communities.
Limiting their ability to work with professional management organizations will only make it harder for them to succeed.
Instead of attacking charter schools, lawmakers should focus on real education reform—like expanding school choice, increasing funding transparency, and empowering parents.
Governor Joe Lombardo should listen to the voices of concerned parents and educators and veto SB 318 if it reaches his desk.
Nevada families deserve more options, not fewer. If SB 318 passes, it will be a step backward for education in our state.
Conservatives and school choice advocates must fight back against this unnecessary government overreach to protect the future of Nevada’s students.
This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
